1. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 1 Proposed Amendment of 802.11a to address Japanese bands and rules Comments on PAR and 5 criteria

2. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 2 Agenda  Where are we?  How did we get here?  What next?

3. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 3 Agenda  Where are we? Preparing PAR and 5 Criteria documents for submission to WG and then SEC  How did we get here? Documents from September: »Overview 11-02-533r1 »PAR 11-02-564r2 »5 Criteria 11-02-565r0 LB43 to submit to SEC passed  What next? Resolve comments and resubmit to WG & SEC

4. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 4 Documents  4 Documents prepared in Monterey (Sept ’02)  PAR Preparation 11-02-480r3  Plenary presentation 11-02-533r1  PAR 11-02-564r2  5 Criteria 11-02-565r0

5. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 5 Status  Letter ballot sent to 802.11 WG voting members requesting approval to submit PAR and 5 Criteria to SEC for approval in November.  387 voting members 251 yes, 3 no, 10 abstain 68.2% response, 98.8% approval

6. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 6 Activities This Week  Collect comments from SEC by Tuesday 5 pm  Resolve comments on PAR & 5C from 802.11 LB and SEC by end of Tuesday Revise text as necessary and post to server  Reballot in Wed 802.11 plenary  Submit final text to SEC by 5pm Wed

7. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 7 Comments – Status @5pm Nov 12 13 Comments received 802.11 WG Comments (11 Total) Overall – 5 PAR – 3 5 Criteria – 3 SEC (1 comment) 802.15 (1 Total) Other WG? (0)

8. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 8 Overall Comments on Proposed Project

9. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 9 WG11 Comments on PAR

10. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 10 WG11 Comments on 5 Criteria

11. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 11 Other 802 Comments 802.15 WG Comments (1 Total) Since this band overlaps the public safety band in the US, it would be good to ensure that the PAR incorporates mechanism to not allow operation of devices in this band while in the US. SEC Comments (1 Total) We develop standards for world wide use. We should not be developing standards for particular countries. If JIS or some other interested party wishes to develop a "profile" of the 802.11 standard that changes parameters for a particular market that is fine but not appropriate business for 802. The "compatibilty" response in the 5 Criteria is not appropriate. The correct response is that this project will destroy compatibility at the air interface for 802.11

12. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 12 Frequency Band 4.904.924.944.964.985.005.025.045.065.085.105.125.14 New US Public Safety Band 4.95.05.035.091

13. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 13 Public Safety FCC Docket 00-32 Report and Order 02-047 Adopted Feb 14 ’02, Released Feb27 ’02 …allocating 50 megahertz of spectrum in the 4940-4990 MHz band This allocation and designation will provide public safety users with additional spectrum to support new broadband applications such as high-speed digital technologies and wireless local area networks (WLANs) for incident scene management. The spectrum will also support dispatch operations and vehicular/personal communications. NPRM

14. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 14 Detailed Discussions

15. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 15 Comment on Formation (1 of 13) Comment 1. Too many task groups running. Wait until other TGs finished.  Move to reject the comment with the following response and proceed with no changes to PAR or 5C.  We recognize that plenary and interim meetings are busy periods of time. We deem that proceeding with this activity now is the best course of action. The WG chair will continue to manage the meeting agenda to ensure that no more than four sessions meet concurrently. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Peter Ecclesine Yes 19 No 0 Abstain 11 Motion passes

16. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 16 Comment on Formation (2 of 13) Comment 2. Change the title. Move to reject the comment with the following response and proceed with no changes to PAR or 5C. The PAR is intended to address the addition of new bands between 4.9 and 5.1 GHz but it will also address corrective changes to behavior in the 5.15 to 5.25 band. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Sheng Li Yes 18 No 0 Abstain 15 Motion passes

17. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 17 Comments on 5 Criteria (3,4,5 of 13) Comments 3. The word "laptop" is too restrictive. All WLAN devices should be included instead. 4.The statement is made "The PAR will define only one radio extension to 802.11a, such that laptops can be operated…". As a standards committee are we not interested in having ALL 802.11a devices capable of being operated? 5. The word "laptop" is too restrictive. All WLAN devices should be included instead.

18. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 18 5 Criteria wording (3,4,5 of 13) 3b) One unique solution per problem (not two solutions to a problem). The PAR will define only one radio extension to 802.11a, such that laptops can be operated in 4.9 GHz, 5.0 GHz as well as 5.15-5.25 GHz. The PAR will define only one radio extension to 802.11a, such that WLAN devices can be operated in 4.9 GHz, 5.0 GHz as well as 5.15-5.25 GHz. Move to accept the comments and replace the word “laptops” with “WLAN devices”. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Kazuhiro Okanoue Yes 30 No 0 Abstain 2 Motion passes

19. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 19 Comments on Public Safety (6,7 of 13) Comments 6. Since this band overlaps the public safety band in the US, it would be good to ensure that the PAR incorporates mechanism to not allow operation of devices in this band while in the US. 7. The 4.9 GHz band is allocated for public safety use in the US. I am concerned that Japanese laptops with 802.11a cards may be used in ad hoc mode in the US by visitors and may interfere with public safety radios.

20. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 20 Comments on Public Safety (6,7 of 13) Move to accept the comments and add the following text to: 5 Criteria Section 2. COMPATIBILITY It is known that one of the US Public Safety bands overlaps the newly proposed Japanese WLAN bands. As one method of preventing a STA from becoming a source of interference with the US Public Safety band radios, the Japanese banded 4.9 & 5.0 GHz stations could employ passive scanning and read AP beacon information to determine legal bands before transmitting when operating in infrastructure mode. IBSS operating mode could also present a source of interference, however, it is not allowed in Japan in 4.9 & 5.0 GHz and therefore can be disabled in these new bands. Additional interference mitigation approaches will be considered in the task group The base stations will not pose a problem since they are individually licensed and configured, while the client radios are not. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Peter Ecclesine Yes 22 No 3 Abstain 15 Motion passes

21. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 21 Regulatory Scope (8,9,10 of 13) Comments 8. The PAR and the 5 criteria are only going to cover standard changes according to Japanese specific regulations. If in other parts in the world (e.g. in Europe) individual countries also come up with different regulatory requirements how does the WG plan to deal with those? Would that always require a new project request or shouldn’t we try to find a general solution for that issue (e.g. a kind of informative annex). 9. We develop standards for world wide use. We should not be developing standards for particular countries. If JIS or some other interested party wishes to develop a "profile" of the 802.11 standard that changes parameters for a particular market that is fine but not appropriate business for 802. 10.Updating 802.11 for Japan is the tip of the iceberg. We need to form a plan to update the whole document for regulatory information.

22. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 22 Regulatory Scope Proposed response : This project does not impair the CSMA air interface, nor interoperation in US bands, as the changed behavior is keyed to knowing the country of operation (using ISO/IEC 3166-1:1997 Country codes) as well as the frequency band to attempt communication on. In every regulatory domain known, it is required to know the country of operation before attempting transmission of radio energy (active probing), so that the transmission can be lawful. The PAR and Five Criteria intend to extend 802.11a to regulatory domains that regulate EIRP rather than Transmit Power, and recommend listening, which FCC and ETSI do not. Japan requires co-adjacent channel power restrictions (two channels away) and restricted modes (Peer-to-peer prohibited) rules that were not envisioned when.11a was created. The Scope of the PAR is limited to Japan, as that bounds the regulations that differ from existing US Part 15 rules and from Project 802.11h's scope. WG 802.11 could use a maintenance PAR mechanism to address regulatory changes required in other bands or regulatory domains. Move to use the above response with no document wording changes. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Al Petrick Yes 21 No 0 Abstain 14 Motion passes

23. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 23 5.15-5.25 revision (11 of 13) Comment 11. If we amend the IEEE802.11 standard to comprehend interoperating in the new bands at 4.9 and 5.03 GHz in Japan then we should update the standard to comprehend the existing unique channels in Japan - channel 14 in the 2.4 band and channels 34,38, 42 and 46 in the 5.15-5.25 band. It is implied that the requirements for Ch 14 are the same as those for Chs 1-13; that is not the case. Similarly the power and channelization for the 5.15-5.25 band in Japan is not the same as that for the US. In fact, the existing spec only reflects requirements for the US in the 5 GHz band.

24. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 24 5.15-5.25 revision (11 of 13) Move to submit the following response with no changes to document wording  The PAR does intend to add the channel assignment and etiquette behavior in Japan for the previously allocated 5.15-5.25 band.  The scope of this PAR does not address changes required to meet Japanese regulatory requirements in the 2.4 GHz band. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Peter Ecclesine Yes 24 No 0 Abstain 12 Motion passes

25. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 25 11d Comment (12 of 13) Comment 12. Another standard that currently exists, and which is called out as needing "modification", is 802.11d. I would guess that this implies it has a "similar scope".

26. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 26 11d Comment (12 of 13) Response As indicated in the documents, the content of 802.11d will need to be adjusted to include country code information. Move to respond as noted above with no changes to the PAR & 5C documents. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Al Petrick Yes 24 No 0 Abstain 11 Motion passes

27. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 27 Channel Selection (13 of 13) Comment 13. The PAR indicates that channel selection is one of the purposes of the project (item 10). It then goes on to indicate that 802.11h contains power control features which will be used. There are also channel selection features of 802.11h which is seems to me should also be used if that is one of the purposes of the project.

28. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 28 Channel Selection (13 of 13) Response Move to accept the comment and provide the following response with a associated change to the PAR Section 15. The power control and channel selection mechanisms in 11h (draft) seem to be applicable for use and may be extended to the new channels. Current wording There are extensions in the 802.11 TGh draft for power control that will be used in this project. New wording The 802.11 TGh draft has power control and frequency selection mechanisms that may be used in this project. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Kazuhiro Okanoue Yes 27 No 0 Abstain 10

29. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 29 Motion  Move to empower the WNG SC Chair & Vice-chair to incorporate the collection of wording changes previously approved (contained in 668 r2) into the PAR (564r2) and 5C (565r1) documents for approval at the WG plenary on Wednesday Nov 13 ‘02. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Peter Ecclesine Motion passes unanimously (37)